Do I understand correctly, that when an individual is within a 400 ft radius of a building or tower, that he can surpass the 400 ft height limit as long as he stays withing that 400 ft radius? Or is this just for part 107 pilots? Thanks.
Exception to the 400 ft limit?
- Thread starter Mikep47
- Start date
That is for 107 pilots, not regular 336.
§ 107.51 Operating limitations for small unmanned aircraft.
(b) The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level, unless the small unmanned aircraft: (1) Is flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure; and (2) Does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit.
§ 107.51 Operating limitations for small unmanned aircraft.
(b) The altitude of the small unmanned aircraft cannot be higher than 400 feet above ground level, unless the small unmanned aircraft: (1) Is flown within a 400-foot radius of a structure; and (2) Does not fly higher than 400 feet above the structure’s immediate uppermost limit.
There is no 400 ft limit when flying under Part 101 - it's just an FAA recommendation. The AMA Safety Handbook requires no more than 400 ft within 3 miles of an airport.
Yes - Part 101, subpart E, is the implementation of the special rule for model aircraft.
OK perhaps I'm missing it. I see no mention of altitude limitations in subpart E that would suggest the ability to fly over 400 AGL.
OK. Look I know nothing about this hobby. I don't own a drone yet. I don't know all of the drone rules. But I'm willing to learn. I've seen alot of conflicting info from different places. Just trying to get some simple answers. Sar I have no idea what that last response means, or how it helps me.
Read this 14 CFR 101.41 - Applicability.
14 CFR 101.41 Applicability.
(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;
THEN READ THIS
Recreational Users | Know Before You Fly
And understand that these are GUIDELINES.
I apologize - that wasn't a very helpful response if you are not somewhat familiar with this issue. The point I was trying to make is that laws, in general, tell you what you must do and what you may not do. They do not enumerate everything that you may do. In this case, the lack of a specified altitude restriction means that there is not one within Part 101 itself. Just like the lack of a statement on how fast you can fly doesn't imply a speed limit.
No worries. However, if I were to ask the powers in charge, Why not enumerate everything? Why not lay things out on the table where everyone can have a very clear, concise view? Some of these rules/regulations/laws are about as clear as muddy water-not to mention a bit contradicting. Because of this...there is an underlying opinion not "openly" expressed here and other places.
Laws just are never written like that, and for good reason - they would end up huge and still miss stuff. Trying to spell out everything that is allowed would not be practical. Where would it end? They tell you what is prohibited and you can infer that if it is not prohibited then it is allowed.
And another way to say the same thing is that you don’t need a law to tell you that you can do something. By default, you CAN do anything that it is possible to do. Laws impose restrictions - not permissions. Would you rather live in a world in which you were not allowed to do ANYTHING at all unless somebody wrote a law saying that it was okay?
Not only that, but the FAA has no reglutory nor rules to my knowlege that limits speed, height, nor statuory limits for 101 regs. "Now"having made that statement, it "does" mean, if you take up your drone within the spacial limitations or regulations on the various claases of airspace, you won't be called to task. At this point, Civilian drone operation is still in it's infancy in the US. That is why is it important to get your Commerical now, and be grandfathered in, before the FAA enacted all kinds of restrictions and rules, that getting a licence to even fly a drone becomes so expensive to take a FAA approved course will cost a small fortune. This is just my humble opinion.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2017
- Messages
- 108
- Reaction score
- 33
- Age
- 53
There are some 3000' towers near me, just under the Bravo......I may go over and fly to the top (within 400' of course) and check out the view. What could go wrong???
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2017
- Messages
- 108
- Reaction score
- 33
- Age
- 53
no, but "just under" I meant it...the Bravo starts at 3200' in that area. I doubt I could see it at 3200 feet however, which would violate line of site of course
I fly over that tower all of the time in my Bonanza, but the drone burns a lot less fuel!
I fly over that tower all of the time in my Bonanza, but the drone burns a lot less fuel!
Then if you are flying under Part 107 and are still in Class G or E it is explicitly allowed from an altitude point of view. VLOS is is different question, and the same question would apply to Part 101.
Similar threads
